Thank you Jeff for your explaination. It is much clearer now.
Best regards.
Olivier
2010/5/15 Jeff Squyres
> On May 12, 2010, at 8:19 AM, Olivier Riff wrote:
>
> > What I do not understand is where the value of 2104m for the virtual
> memory comes from.
> > When I add the value of Mem used (77
On May 12, 2010, at 8:19 AM, Olivier Riff wrote:
> What I do not understand is where the value of 2104m for the virtual memory
> comes from.
> When I add the value of Mem used (777848k) to the value of the cache
> (339184k) : the amount is by far inferior to the Virtual memory (2104m).
> Are her
